October 7, 2008

6:14 Central Time: I'm just setting up the post so you'll know I'm doing this again.

8:11: After they blame each other for the financial crisis, Obama tells us we don't want to hear them blaming each other. We just want to know how to stay in our homes and pay our bills. McCain sounds a little shaky and winded. He's wearing a shiny dark suit and a pink and red striped tie. Obama -- in an unshiny suit and a blue-purple tie -- seems relaxed. He's got a casual way of sitting on the stool.

8:20: The first 3 questions have been about the crisis, the third being, quite sensibly: How can we trust you guys who let us get into this trouble in the first place? McCain points to his record, and repeatedly tells us he's reached across the aisle. Does that make you trustworthy? The 2 men seem mainly to be recycling their old talking points more than speaking directly to the crisis.

8:28: An old woman emails in her demand that people be asked to make sacrifices. McCain repeats his ideas about cutting spending, and makes a second reference to an overhead projector that Obama procured for the Chicago planetarium. Again with the earmarks. What was the dollar figure on earmarks? I heard $1 billion. That seems like nothing compared to the $750 billion bailout. And what is the sacrifice? Not getting more earmarks? Obama reminds us of the way Bush told us after 9/11 to "go out and shop." Bush, it seems, could have demanded sacrifices, but Obama doesn't say what we should have sacrificed then or now, though he does advise us to be energy efficient. It's really not too inspiring, but I think Obama is trying to seem cool, solid, and not at all exciting. In the background, we see McCain writing, awkwardly, on a note pad, and maybe some of us think about McCain's sacrifices.

8:37: Tom Brokaw is in control! Obama will not be permitted to say something about taxes because "it's important." Ha ha. As I was writing "it's important," O said "it's important" again.

8:41: McCain thinks he's making a big funny by saying "I'll answer the question!" Because, you know, Obama didn't want to go on to the next question before. No one laughs, but he looks so happy with his wisecracks. "Too many lobbyists workin' there," he says, and I think he's trying to sound Palinesque.

8:44: McCain's plan seems to be to sound passionate and caring. And to say "Lieberman" frequently.

8:46: Jac is live-blogging too: "9:30 - Cringe-inducing word choice from Obama: "A lot of you remember the tragedy of 9/11..." He can safely assume we all remember."

8:47: I love Brokaw. Watch the damned lights! He finds it hard to believe the candidates aren't watching the lights. Obama pops up and says he's just trying to keep up with McCain. In other words, he did it first! That seemed a little dorky and childish.

8:50: I was just admiring Obama's elegant gestures with his long, thin hands, when McCain positioned himself in the background and made a hand gesture that can only be described as holding an invisible grapefruit in front of your chest.

8:55: Obama says that health care should be a right. (McCain called it a "responsibility.") Obama seems relaxed and smiling but also oddly pissed that McCain has been "throwing a lot of things out there."

9:01: We've finally arrived at foreign policy, and McCain seems very relieved. Obama takes the subject of Iraq and ties it to the economy: Iraq has a surplus, so why are we spending our money over there? He's made this argument many times, but it has more resonance this week.

9:05: What is Obama's standard for when we should intervene for purely humane reasons, where there are no American interests? I hear no statement of doctrine. What is McCain's doctrine? We should intervene whenever there is a genocide if we have the means to improve the situation. (That's why he stood up to Reagan about Lebanon.)

9:14: Obama says McCain has called him "green behind the ears." Some sort of moss or fungus?

9:27: The question is how we would respond to an attack by Iran on Israel, and McCain makes a strong connection to the military man in the audience who asked the question. Obama's answer recycles material about energy independence. He talks about negotiations and diplomacy. Okay, and then? What if there is an attack? Will you be there? I can't tell.

9:30: "What don't you know and how will you learn it?" A cute question. Cute and disturbing. Obama decides to just deliver his prepared closing statement. The last 8 years sucked. Can't get the same a different result doin' the same thing, so we need change. McCain says what he doesn't know is what we all don't know: the stuff that's going to happen in the future! [CORRECTION, made at 6:53 am: We'd really be screwed if evening doing something different made a different result impossible. I apologize for the accidental pessimism. I will endeavor to confine myself, in the future, to pessimism of the intentional kind.]

9:34: I began this live-blog with a big mug of lapsang souchong tea, but about 15 minutes ago, I switched to cognac:

9:42: Wow. Over 600 comments! I'll need to go in there and see what you folks are saying. For now though, let's do a little poll:

9:55: I was scrolling through my HDTV recording, looking to photograph the "invisible grapefruit," and I noticed that Obama was wearing an earpiece. I photographed the freeze-frame and have set up a new post to display it.

10:09: I reconsider the perception of an earpiece. I don't see it in other frames. I'm sure a real secret earpiece would be way less visible, inside the ear canal.

11:21: I'm reading the comments, and the general opinion is that the debate was very boring. It was boring to me, because they were saying things I've heard before. Maybe some people are listening closely for the first time, and for them, it might have been interesting. But it should have been new and exciting for all of us, given the events of the past week.

6:55 am: When I woke up this morning, I decided to concentrate my mind on the question which man won.... Ah, what am I doing in this old post? Making a couple corrections. My new morning perceptions will be in new post.

Given the way that the numbers are pointing, we need something extraordinary and serendipitous to take place in the next month or else brace ourselves for the long cold night of an Obama administration and its aftermath. Obama falling flat on his face tonight would be a start. But let's be honest: is that really likely?

You're right, host with the most, if McCain continues his lies people like you will continue to support him...never mind how McCain tanked the early bailout negotations with his bull-in-a-china-shop antics.

Go'bama, Go'bama!!!

This thread to 2000 comments! Thought it's doubtful because McCain/Obama are a lot more boring than Palin/Biden.

Mixalhs: Lies??? what about Obama saying "oh, Ayers is just a neighbor." Now it comes out that he not only worked for/with him, but continued to do so even after he learned of Ayers past. Hmmm, talk about lies.

We live in the age of American Idol and youth as king. When do you ever even see old people on TV?

McCain and Palin need to focus on what they can do for people NOW and in the near future in two key areas.

First they need to highlight the fact the McCain can work with Democrats for the good of the country against the wishes of partisan Republicans. But that he will also stand up against the excesses of the Democrat congress. McCain needs to convince people that a 100% Democrat party control of Washington would be an added disaster.

Second they need to talk about Alaskan oil wealth. Here we have the Alaskan governor on the ticket and almost no talk about the hydrocarbon gold mine in Alaska.

They need to talk about the need to get OUR oil out of the ground and to use that revenue to pay for the huge expenses of the debt, bailout and any health care legislation.

And point out that by using our oil resources we will reduce our direct and indirect contributions to the treasury of Putin, Chavez and I'm a dinner jacket.

But I'm not hopeful.

Mixalhs said...This thread to 2000 comments! Thought it's doubtful because McCain/Obama are a lot more boring than Palin/Biden.

No way. Sarah Palin is a star, like her or not. More people tuned in to watch her than McCain/Messiah.

Forget about the Eagleton/Dan Quayle nonsense. The woman is a young Elvis.

They said Elvis couldn't sing. Didn't matter did it.

cookasia said...Mixalhs: Lies??? what about Obama saying "oh, Ayers is just a neighbor." Now it comes out that he not only worked for/with him, but continued to do so even after he learned of Ayers past.

You think so? I've seen arguments to that effect, but if the Democrats in the Press and Congress continue to treat the GOP as their main enemy, what'll happen is amnesty will be painted as selling the country out.

Although amnesty does seem to be immune to that, to some degree. But I'm not sure how Obama's Presidency makes it any less likely.

I don't think there are any Democrats who would filibuster an amnesty bill. There are Republicans who would do so, but would they do so even when a Republican president was backing the bill? That seems unlikely.

I don't think there are any Democrats who would filibuster an amnesty bill. There are Republicans who would do so, but would they do so even when a Republican president was backing the bill? That seems unlikely.

Didn't they, though? I mean, it didn't get to the filibuster point, I don't think, but wasn't it the Reps that killed the amnesty bills this term? I think there were some Dems in there, too.

Some of our elected officials--and I know this is going to sound wild--but some of them seem to have principles.

Mixalhs said... "simon, [c]an you really be taken seriously with your Scalia sensei avatar? Also, doesn't calling a judge "master" contradict your party's War on Activist Judges? Put another way, should the people be their own masters?"

Kudos for accurately reading the japanese, but a demerit for mistranslation. ;) While that might suffice as a crude if literal translation, as Inara said, there are nuances of meaning. In this sense "master" might better be translated as a respectful address for a "teacher," which is certainly how it is meant here. Moreover, why would acknowledging the respect due to Justice Scalia contradict any "war" on activist judges? The GOP has no beef with judges. Just activist judges, which Justice Scalia is not, unless one buys into the sophomoric attempts - that's Judge Luttig's description, not mine - of Cass Sunstein, Lori Ringhand et al to redefine the term into meaninglessness.

Where I live it's all Obama all the time. No McCain signs or bumperstickers at all. I think NC might go for the communist crypto-muslim. Either that or like me, most conservatives are concerned that our property will be damaged if we advertise a political position unpopular with the anarchist/nilist left.

In another thread someone lamented the possibility of a upcoming Camelot/Beatlemania era. The reality is, Camelot lasted from January 20th, 1961 until November 22, 1963. The Beatles, in terms of popularity in this country, from 1964 until '69 or '70. Either way, we can endure that standing on our head.

Obama falling flat on his face tonight would be a start. But let's be honest: is that really likely?

Well if he can be distracted long enough, maybe McCain can get someone to tie his shoelaces together.

I think an Obama administration will be good for the country because the homeless guy I have to step over every day on the way to work tells me Obama will help him. If he helps him enough to get him a shower I'll vote for him. I'm also looking forward to my tax cut. I don't have to drive much which means that more money I can spend at Mickey's Pub and the strip bar down the street.

Simon: "Given the way that the numbers are pointing, we need something extraordinary and serendipitous to take place in the next month or else brace ourselves for the long cold night of an Obama administration and its aftermath."

And God only knows things have been soooooooooooooooooooo good under the current administration, supported at a 90-95% clip by McCain.

I honestly think some here are so completely delusional, so intent on hating Obama, they abandon all sense of reality.

Three weeks ago John McCain said the economy was "fundamentally strong." (Just today the market dropped 500 points.)

I am Tom Brokaw, your moderator for tonight's second Presidential debate between Senators John McCain and Barack Obama. The debate will last 90 minutes, and its format will be in Town Hall style -- but there is a twist.

We at NBC have decided to take the nation on a ride in our Memory Machine, so we can then fast forward to a relevant part of the debate where John McCain gives it to Barack Obama good and strong. We will then make this interchange go down the memory hole because it makes the Democrats look bad.

- Sounds of tape fast forwarding to minute 33:16 of the debate -

Pony Tail Gal: Senator Obama, the American public has learnt this weekend, through no less a left-wing rag as the New York Times yet, that you were a long-time associate of domestic terrorist, Bill Ayers. Your camp brushed away such rumours as "fictious hogwash on the part of Rupert Murdoch's diseased mind", and I quote.

What say you about this today, now that even closet-case Anderson Cooper of CNN called you "a liar, but still a total hottie"?

Senator Barack Obama: L-lllook. I knn-nnow that the American people understand this election is not about me, my dubious past, my friends, or my Muslim faith, sorry my Christian faith. It's about the economy.

I've explained time and time again, that when William Ayers, who I have only met twice, and one of those times I was just minding my own biness when he was walking his dog down my street, was doing all those reprehensible things I was only 8 years-old.

Senator John McCain, interrupting: Senator Obama you were in Indonesia when you were 8 years-old.

Senator Barack Obama: What's your point, Tom, I mean John?

Senator John McCain: The point is that you were naive, even DANGEROUS when you were 8 years-old.

Senator Barack Obama: John, that's not fair.

Senator John McCain, interrupting: You know what is not fair, son? I'll tell you what's not fair. Being in a cage inside the Hanoi Hilton, being fed rat hairs and crackers for breakfast. That's not fair, son. (raises voice)

What I went through in that place, your precious William Ayers escaped without serving a single day in prison for defaming his country, making bombs to kill policemen and blowing up the Pentagon. On 9/11, he said he was sorry he hadn't done enough. (audience gasps)

But even if he had been caught, served time and then had been pardoned by President Clinton like he did those two other Weathermen, chances are you'd still have served with this scumbag if ACORN said you should. (flushes beet red)

You are a joke of a Manchurian candidate, son. America will know you for what you are! I will make your name known, I will make your name known!

Senator John McCain: You're damn right they are. (starts taking off coat) I'll show them who I am. (starts undoing tie, audience stirs) I suffered more for this country than William Ayers suffered in two decades of his. (takes off shirt, audience gasps) THESE ARE MY SCARS, Senator. I got them because I am an American and bad people who hated America did harm to me because of it. Where are your scars, Senator?!

I'll tell you where they are. NO WHERE. You sided with the kind of people who gave me those scars, but worse than that. They weren't foreigners, they were AMERICANS.

You had a choice.

Walk away from William Ayers, or schmooze in his living-room as he introduced you to dozens of America-hating people. Your choice, and YOU chose to shake the hands of the Benedict Arnolds of our time!

-- Sounds of rewinding, tape being deleted, going down the memory hole, returning to the beginning of the debate --

While that might suffice as a crude if literal translation, as Inara said, there are nuances of meaning. In this sense "master" might better be translated as a respectful address for a "teacher," which is certainly how it is meant here.

It isn't even a good crude translation. Sensei is a term of respect given to one with superior skill or knowledge. It connotes authority in the sense that a lawyer is an authority on the law, not in the sense of "a person who can command obedience".

Is being totally fucking butt ugly a requirement to be in those commie protest groups? If those chicks would just get laid occassionally, they probably won't be so pissed off all the time. Ok most are probably carpet munchers but that's beside the point.

Did someone say something about a drinking game? I have half a case of Smithwicks and a whole bottle of Red Breast.

McCain can win this-he needs to lose the Army of One routine, try not to attack your fellow Republicans [because the electorate won't be able to find The Maverick Party on the ballot] and talk about the issues that the electorate care about.No really earmarks isn't it.

Get a grip, man! Anything can happen in the 29 days left to the election. A new scientific discovery for instant boners. Tina Fey coming down with a nasty case of mono. The Devil Rays winning the World Series. ANYTHING.

Seriously, what gives my fellow conservative Althousians? Politics is a game. We could land on Boardwalk any moment. Have freaking faith.

Anyway, i don't worry about the spineless, selfish drones who traded their love of country for their economic wellbeing - like you Michael. People like you will always put your selfishness before country.

It is essentially impossible to answer that question without running afoul of the law. You can't promise a cabinet position to a supporter prior to the election, and what non-supporter would a politician tap for a job like that?

Obama isn't interested in the economics, which is the trouble. It's like women and math.

When you securitize risk enough so that it can travel in a circle, I bet you get a system that has multiple stable states; so that careful analysis can predict it will wind up in one of the states, but not which one. In particular the value of underlying assets is no longer enough to say what happens.

When two such locally evolved systems then interact, they don't average, but rather adopt a winner-take-all result that's likewise unpredictable.

You want as few of those kinds of systems as possible.

Notice that I didn't mention failed Bush policies or pensions. It's possible to find the situation interesting all on its own.

I did some reading on Brokaw's speech impediment - he either had a cleft palate or a cleft lip, and though repaired, he cannot pronounce the letter "L" at the beginning of a word. Lucky the leading candidate is not Lem.

VB - we have "learnt" nothing, except that the word "thingie" is too personal to discuss in public.

Yes, but so is the news media. The chances of most voters realizing which party is really to blame for this mess are, therefore, pretty slim. You can call Obama a liar all you want, but he's almost certainly going to get away with it.

I want a new rule for these townhall debates. The person who asks the question gets to taser the candidate if the candidate doesn't answer the question. Not if the candidate gives an answer that the questioner doesn't like, mind you, but if they duck the question entirely, as for example both McCain and Obama have done with every question so far.

In British English Fannie is nearly as funny as Watergate buggers. Odd bunch, those Brits, always messin' about with our language until all rhyme and reason have gone missing. Bangers have more to do with mash than gangs. It's a wonder we can communicate with them at all.

Sorry to pimp my own blog post, but I think this is the key for both candidates, and the reason Obama has pulled ahead. The swing voters in the swing states are older, own their own homes and have investments. They are closer to retirement, thus the hit on their home prices and IRAs/401ks is putting them in a desperate circumstance.

These voters are normally more conservative. They watch Fox News. However, they've likely shifted heavily to Obama over the past 10 days. They are mad and scared.

McCain can get them back, but he's got to have an answer for the person who thought they were about to retire, thought they'd built a pretty good retirement nest egg, and all of a sudden are 30 percent poorer.

It's unclear if Obama really has any answers for these people either. But I think he's doing a better job of sticking the blame away from him and his party.

McCain's started out way too slow... what is it with Obama sending letters to people, warning them of problems... Why can't McCain say, "Is that the way a Senator solves problems, they write letters? No, they introduce legislation... sending a letter is the same as voting Present, covering your butt and doing nothing of note."

Host with the Most said... "McCain is not hitting him hard enough - which is why he can't win."

I disagree. McCain can't win for a very simple reason - because he isn't willing or able to throw Bush under the bus. I thought he'd done enough in alluding to it obliquely in his acceptance speech, but it's now clear that he has to take on this "McSame" smear directly - "I will not be like that guy." It's either that or do something nuclear, something that yanks Obama out of the river and leaves him on the bank convulsing and dying.

The taser idea reminds me of that comic Gallagher, who said that baseball pitchers should be buried into the mound. When the batter came out, different pitchers would come up from the ground. Randy Johnson! Curt Schilling! Greg Maddux!